sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List
List archive
- From: Arjan Bouter <a_bouter AT ezrs.com>
- To: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
- Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] more sorcery stuff
- Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2004 23:50:41 +0200
On Tue, 1 Jun 2004 12:01:11 -0700
Andrew <afrayedknot AT thefrayedknot.armory.com> wrote:
>
> So by now most of you have heard that theres a sorcery 1.10 release.
> My first as sorcery lead.
>
> So in the never ending battle to make things more complicated, here goes.
>
> Several problems have come up, mostly with the cleanse ui, and some
> disagreement about what file the ugly "force you to run cleanse" hack
> should touch. Some other issues with sorcery leaving around .fifo and
> .log files came up.
>
> Currently we have two released tracks of sorcery "stable" and "devel"
> most people's view of devel is that its buggy and might break and
> so forth. The view of stable is that its stable after a while and a
> probably a few critical bug fixes later.
>
> As such, people are reluctant to update to devel to try it out before
> I make a stable release. That being the case its rather difficult to
> provide a fully tested and "stable" release the first time around.
> The only people who test devel are a brave few, and dont provide quite
> enough coverage to ensure a more stable release (as indicated by some
> issues with cleanse).
>
> So what I propose is having a "test" release. Normally the "test" release
> will be identical to the stable release, except for a period of testing
> before a major release, and while trying to sanity test fixes for stable.
>
> In other words, test will track the stable release most of the time, and
> provide an early testing ground for a development team tested release,
> but not a thoroughly user tested release.
>
> Im envisioning the following release "cycle" for sorcery:
>
> *develop new features/fix bugs as they come up (however long we want)
>
> *decide on a mostly fixed release date
>
> *push "devel" into "test" and give test a 1.xx.x-rc1 version
>
> *allow the "test" release to sit for at least one week
Is a week enough? Seems like a short time to find bugs.
I'm using the test version on 2 machines (mostly without "challenges" ;-) )
But I don't update daily (more like once every 2 days). In my situation that
would leave about 5 days to try out all software...
I guess 2 weeks would be better.
>
> *meanwhile new development can continue on devel (eg i dont have to yell
> at anyone for putting untested changes in before a release)
>
> *after a sufficient amount of testing and updating the "test" branch as
> needed (seperately from devel), push test code into stable and form the
> release 1.xx.0
>
> *at this point any new issues that come up with the release can be fixed
> in the test release and a new 1.xx.x-rc1 can be made, subsequent fixes
> thereof can be put into this release rather than blindly putting them
> into a 1.xx.x release. (repeat this as necessary over the lifetime of
> the 1.xx release)
>
>
> The final goal in all this is to have a more stablized "stable" release
> and thus that last step will be less necessary. This of course all hinges
> on the desire for users to use the new test release.
>
> Comments/questions/suggestions?
> Good idea? Bad idea?
I agree to the idea, just that timeframe...
Arjan
>
> -Andrew
>
>
> --
> __________________________________________________________________________
> |Andrew D. Stitt | astitt at sourcemage.org |
> |irc: afrayedknot | afrayedknot at t.armory.com |
> |aim: thefrayedknot or iteratorplusplus | |
> |Sorcery Team Lead, Porting Team Lead | |
> |Grimoire Guru ham/smgl | ftp://t.armory.com |
> |Author and Maintainer of Prometheus | |
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> SM-Discuss mailing list
> SM-Discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sm-discuss
>
--
+=======
Proud Source Mage GNU/Linux user,
Linux so advanced, it may as well be magic.
http://www.sourcemage.org
Registered as user #310617 with the Linux Counter,
http://counter.li.org.
+===
Attachment:
pgpQnHvNdBeRa.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-
[SM-Discuss] more sorcery stuff,
Andrew, 06/01/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] more sorcery stuff,
Arjan Bouter, 06/01/2004
- Re: [SM-Discuss] more sorcery stuff, Andrew, 06/01/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] more sorcery stuff,
Jason Flatt, 06/01/2004
- Re: [SM-Discuss] more sorcery stuff, Andrew, 06/01/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] more sorcery stuff,
Andrew, 06/01/2004
- Re: [SM-Discuss] more sorcery stuff, Arjan Bouter, 06/01/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] more sorcery stuff,
Eric Schabell, 06/02/2004
- Re: [SM-Discuss] more sorcery stuff, Andrew, 06/02/2004
- Re: [SM-Discuss] more sorcery stuff, Andrew, 06/02/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] more sorcery stuff,
Arjan Bouter, 06/01/2004
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.